Going for 2, down 8, with 22 seconds to go

[stech81]

We stopped them on the first series and we rushed 6 on 3rd down. We rushed 3 the rest of the game and they scored at will... explain that.

/

We were testing our DB's to see if 8 players could cover 5 ( they didn't do that well) maybe we need more DB's I think a 5-4-9 defense could help

 

[MWBATL]

We stopped them on the first series and we rushed 6 on 3rd down. We rushed 3 the rest of the game and they scored at will... explain that.

/

I didn’t see much of the game, but the 3rd quarter TD pass by Armstrong was in the face of a 5 or 6 man rush which got very good pressure. But WR was wide open behind #3 and boom!

 

[stech81]

I didn’t see much of the game, but the 3rd quarter TD pass by Armstrong was in the face of a 5 or 6 man rush which got very good pressure. But WR was wide open behind #3 and boom!

Maybe we as fans are looking at this wrong , Changing from the 3O to our new offense takes 7 years to rebuild our defense . Just wait and give our defense 4 more years

 

[UgaBlows]

I didn’t see much of the game, but the 3rd quarter TD pass by Armstrong was in the face of a 5 or 6 man rush which got very good pressure. But WR was wide open behind #3 and boom!

I agree we mixed it up with more blitzes than people are giving us credit for, Armstrong makes a decision and gets rid of the ball very quick, or he would take off running......so painful to watch over and over

 

[LibertyTurns]

Yes, this is the right way to look at the play. I like that we’re using analytics in this way, it’s on-brand. Unfortunately, the average armchair QB does not understand the math (which is why Vegas is so profitable). It will be interesting to see if we do it again - Mike Tomlin caught a ton of grief when his similar strategy failed, people still question shifts and lack of “small ball” on baseball, etc

From the time we kicked the FG to the end of the game was one of CGC’s best coaching sequences. We failed to execute and let them get a TD on a long field after the fake insides kick, then couldn’t pull off another miracle with 22 secs left. Really though, it was a pretty good effort and not the normal confused, bewildered, stunned response we’ve been accustomed to.

 

[senoiajacket]

I gotta agree that this was BY FAR CGC's best strategic games, especially the sequence that Liberty refers to. Having the onsides kicks work out, of course "facilitates" making those decisions look good, none the less, they were good decisions. Compare that to Mendenhalls end of the first half decisions which were absolutely bizzare and looked like they had choosen some random fan from the stands to manage the end of the half for UVA.

So, I've been critical (at least in my mind, if not on this board) of CGCs decision making in the past. But this game gives me hope, at least from that perspective.

 

[UgaBlows]

I gotta agree that this was BY FAR CGC's best strategic games, especially the sequence that Liberty refers to. Having the onsides kicks work out, of course "facilitates" making those decisions look good, none the less, they were good decisions. Compare that to Mendenhalls end of the first half decisions which were absolutely bizzare and looked like they had choosen some random fan from the stands to manage the end of the half for UVA.

So, I've been critical (at least in my mind, if not on this board) of CGCs decision making in the past. But this game gives me hope, at least from that perspective.

Yes, signs that he is learning, and improving.

 

[Root4GT]

We stopped them on the first series and we rushed 6 on 3rd down. We rushed 3 the rest of the game and they scored at will... explain that.

/

Do you remember the 70+ yard TD pass? We rushed 6 including a CB on 3rd down. How did that work out.

 

[UgaBlows]

Do you remember the 70+ yard TD pass? We rushed 6 including a CB on 3rd down. How did that work out.

Did we play any man coverage with our DB’s at all in the game or all zone?

 

[Fatmike91]

Do you remember the 70+ yard TD pass? We rushed 6 including a CB on 3rd down. How did that work out.

They would have scored anyway so it doesn't matter. All that matters is getting stops.

/

 

[bobongo]

They would have scored anyway so it doesn't matter. All that matters is getting stops.

/

I said before the game and I'll say it now - in order to win this one we had to gamble often and bring the heat, Tenuta-style. We did some, but not enough.

 

[jgtengineer]

Do you remember the 70+ yard TD pass? We rushed 6 including a CB on 3rd down. How did that work out.

The safety dove instead of wrapped up he was in position schematically and just faield to make a play.

 

[Root4GT]

The safety dove instead of wrapped up he was in position schematically and just faield to make a play.

Yup, same as the LB didn’t take a deep enough drop on the 3rd and 16. Bad things happen when players don’t make plays.

 

[Golden Tornadoes]

Did we play any man coverage with our DB’s at all in the game or all zone?

I don't really think it would have mattered either way. Our DB's have proven time and again they can't play man but apparently they can't play zone either.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

We just scored a TD to close the gap to 8. We have the option to kick the XP or go for 2. The announcer stated that analytics suggest you go for 2 in that situation before he even recognized we were attempting it.

As an engineer and former math nerd, my head hurt trying to think through the analytics. Fortunately, I found an explanation, in case anyone cares:

Source: https://americanfootballdatabase.fandom.com/wiki/Two-point_conversion

Last I saw, the general odds of converting a 2-point attempt in CFB was around 44%. Playing a defense like UVA's in theory increases the odds I suppose.

That makes a lot of sense -math wise. But I was against going for 2 for psychological reasons. If you don’t make the 2 the momentum shifts back to the other team. This decreases the chances that your team will even be able to score again.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Okay, forget the math. In this case, the “analytics” can be explained to coaches in terms of a simple logical decision tree. Under the presumption that you are going to go for the chance to win, you MUST complete a “risky” 2-pt conversion on at least one of the 2 (presumed) TDs that you score.

You are far better off knowing the result of the risky decision after the first TD, so that you can use that knowledge when deciding what to do after the second TD. You made the 2PC? Kick the PAT next time for the high-probability win. You missed that first 2PC? Well, try it again for the chance of at least a tie.

If, on the other hand, you put off the risky call until after your second TD, your first decision (to kick the PAT] was made blind to the outcome of the second play. You make the PAT then miss the 2PC? You are hosed, because you can’t go back in time and exchange the PAT call for a 2P—.you just lost the game, pal. You make the 2PC? Lucky you, you won the game despite painting yourself into a corner.

This only makes sense if you can guarantee that you will indeed score a second touchdown. In my experience the second touchdown never comes because missing the 2 pt conversion almost always deflates your offense. Doing the math works unless you have math anxiety, the psychological impact on the team that just lost the 2pt conversion.

 

[Tech93]

If he would have made a good pass, we would have converted.

 

[stech81]

If he would have made a good pass, we would have converted.

If a frog had wings he would bump he butt when he jumps

 

[Root4GT]

This only makes sense if you can guarantee that you will indeed score a second touchdown. In my experience the second touchdown never comes because missing the 2 pt conversion almost always deflates your offense. Doing the math works unless you have math anxiety, the psychological impact on the team that just lost the 2pt conversion.

Generally the 2nd TD never comes because the team that scored never gets the ball back. It requires recovering an onside kick and driving 50+ yards often with less than 1 min 30 sec and no timeouts. If a team does recover an onside kick they do not suffer psychologically. The math works unless you are the clear superior team that is much more likely to win an overtime game. Then play for a tie. Otherwise go for the win. Much less pressure on the offense on the 1st two point conversion.

 

[bke1984]

Do you remember the 70+ yard TD pass? We rushed 6 including a CB on 3rd down. How did that work out.

Well the strategy sort of depends on the man in coverage not diving wildly at the receiver when he knows he has no help behind him…